379 #&U y¥<?. VB3£ A COMPARISON OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEMS OF TAIWAN, SINGAPORE, AND HONG KONG AS A MODEL FOR DEVELOPING NATIONS, 1945-1980 DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of North Texas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Em-Amorn Kumnuch Denton, Texas Summer, 1996 379 #&U y¥<?. VB3£ A COMPARISON OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEMS OF TAIWAN, SINGAPORE, AND HONG KONG AS A MODEL FOR DEVELOPING NATIONS, 1945-1980 DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of North Texas in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Em-Amorn Kumnuch Denton, Texas Summer, 1996 Kumnuch, Em-Amorn, A comparison of the higher education systems of Taiwan. Singapore, and Hong Kong as a model for developing nations. 1945-1980. Doctor of Philosophy (College Teaching), August, 1996, 162 pp., 9 tables, 16 illustrations, references, 151 titles. The purposes of this study were to (a) examine higher education activities from 1945 to 1980 before Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong became newly industrialized countries; (b) study the higher education reforms that each country made in its progress in order to meet the challenge; (c) compare and contrast the higher education systems that were adopted; and (d) identify a single Asian higher education system model (descriptive model) for any country that desires to become an industrialized country. Historical research was utilized in this study. This study was approached as follows: First, the economic growth of the countries under study was examined. Then, the countries' higher education systems were compared and contrasted. The result is at least one possible higher education system model that can be used by any country to improve the future performance of its higher education system. The study concluded that the models of higher education used by Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong from 1945 to 1980 were not identical. However, they came to similar conclusions in terms of economic development. In this case, an emerging industrial country like the social and economic condition of Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong would find that adoption of those higher education models might be appropriate. For instance, an emerging country with a social and economic system like Taiwan would find Taiwan's higher education model appropriate for adoption in that country. On the other hand, if an emerging industrial nation has social and economic criteria dissimilar to those of Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, a proposed single model of higher education would be appropriate, with an adjustment to suit the national resources, cultural background, and structure of trades and the labor force of that country. Copyright by Em-Amorn Kumnuch 1996 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Background Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Research Questions Assumptions of the Study Significance of the Study Theoretical Basis for the Study Methodology and Procedures Common Elements in the Three Countries Collection of Materials Organization of the Study 2. HIGHER EDUCATION IN TAIWAN 29 Educational System From 1895 to 1945 Educational System After 1949 Education Expenditures 3. HIGHER EDUCATION IN SINGAPORE 51 Higher Education Prior to 1941 Postwar Higher Education: 1945 to 1959 Higher Education After 1959 Education Expenditures 4. HIGHER EDUCATION IN HONG KONG 75 IV Chapter Page Higher Education Prior to 1941 Higher Education After 1945 Education Expenditures 5. COMPARISON OF HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEMS OF TAIWAN, SINGAPORE, AND HONG KONG AND RECOMMENDATIONS 100 Summary Origins of Education Higher Education Systems Before Industrialization Types of Higher Education During Transition Funding Strategy Models of Higher Education A Single Model of Higher Education System Conclusions Limitations Recommendations APPENDIX A. Letter from Government Information Office: Republic of China 133 B. Letter from Nanyang Technological University: Singapore 135 C. Letter from Ministry of Education: Singapore 137 D. Letter from University Grants Committee: Hong Kong 140 E. Letter from the Association of Commonwealth Universities 142 F. Letter from International Bureau of Education 144 G. Asia Map 146 REFERENCES 148 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Economic Performance of NICs as of 1989 3 2. Total Exports of the Three Countries 10 3. Number of Higher Education Institutions in Taiwan 39 4. Enrollment at Higher Education Institutions in Taiwan 40 5. Ratio of College Students in Different Fields in Taiwan 49 6. The Ratio of Educational Expenditures to GNP 50 7. Enrollment at Higher Education in Singapore 61 8. The Ratio of Educational Expenditures to GNP 74 9. The Ratio of Educational Expenditures to GDP 99 VI LIST OF ILLSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Political Profile 9 2. Taiwan's School System as Outlined by the 1912 Rescript 34 3. Taiwan's School System in 1970 37 4. Taiwan's School System in 1990 38 5. Singapore's Education System, 1961 65 6. Singapore's Education System, 1972 66 7. Hong Kong's Education System, 1968 85 8. Hong Kong's Education System, 1980 86 9. Origins of Education 103 10. Types of Higher Education During Transition 107 11. Funding Strategy Ill 12. Taiwan's Higher Education System 112 13. Singapore's Higher Education System 113 14. Hong Kong's Higher Education System 114 15. Higher Education Model 121 16. Economic Development 128 VII CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background During the past two decades, the world has witnessed the explosive economic growth of Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, three of East Asia's so-called "gang of four," the "four little tigers," or the "little dragons" (Schlossstein,1991) In appendices A through G, the information on the study of these three countries is provided. This information provides a basis for the rational for this qualitative research investigation. The leaders of these countries are higher education graduates. Thus, colleges and universities are critical to producing leaders involved in this growth phenomenon. According to Schlossstein (1991), the little dragons have generated the highest rates of economic growth in the world, with an annual average of 9% compared with nearly 5% in Southeast Asia, less than 4% in Latin America, under 3% in Africa, and just over 2% for the United States. Thirty years ago there were just two categories of economic development: the industrialized (or developed) countries and the developing (or lesser developed) countries. Countries such as South Korea and Taiwan chafed at being categorized as "lesser developed." Because the non- economic areas of their cultures, such as their social organization and rich historical traditions, were in fact highly developed, they collectively became known as "newly industrializing countries," or NICs, instead (Oshima, 1987; Schlossstein, 1991). The economic growth rates of the little dragons have been strong because of their aggressive export strategies. However, it would be an oversimplification to give that factor alone as the reason why growth has been phenomenal. The work ethic of the Chinese using capitalistic practices provides key reasons why (Eddy, 1994). Lim (1991) and Chan (1990) suggested that they have achieved rapid and sustained economic ascendance because of their governments' support, nurture, and promotion of domestic industries and because they have sought out profitable niches in international markets. Thus, certain economic criteria were used to choose three countries of Asia for this study. These criteria are provided here. The qualification for joining the newly industrializing country club for any nation is considered to be a per-capita income between $1,100 and $3,500 and a manufacturing share in the GDP of 20% (Balassa, 1984; O'Neill, 1984; Schlossstein, 1991). As indicated in Table 1, all three of the countries under study qualify easily. Of the many newly industrializing countries, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong were selected for this study. Although these three societies represent less than 1% of the world's land, these countries have dominated the world's textile and electronics industries since the 1960s (Vogel, 1991). Hong Kong has joined New York, London, and Tokyo as one of the great financial centers of the world. The similarities shared by Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, including geographic characteristics, population density, ethnicity, religion and value system, and political structure are discussed in the following section. Table 1 Economic Performance of NICs as of 1989 Per-capita Manufacturing as income % of GDP Taiwan 6,889 35.6 Singapore 10,810 30.1 Hong Kong 10,918 26.7 Note. From Asia's New Little Dragons fp. 5)byS. Schlossstein, 1991, Chicago: Contemporary Books. Geographic Characteristics Taiwan became independent of Japan in 1945, and of mainland China in 1949. However, mainland China still claims it as a province. This is a troublesome problem, as seen in 1996 with the Communist China having military exercises in the Taiwan Straits at the time of the Taiwan national elections. The United States sent its naval ships there because of this concern. Singapore ceased to be one of the 14 states of the Federation of Malaysia and became independent as a republic in 1965. All three countries are small islands close to mainland Asia. The common denominator of the three has been their extremely limited natural resources. Taiwan, which has a limited internal supply of natural resources, does, however, have moderate deposits of coal, natural gas, and possible off-shore oil (Gold, 1985). Taiwan's most important natural resource is its agricultural land, which accounts for one fourth of the total land. Singapore's natural resources are also limited. Singapore has to import food and water from Malaysia, and all of its energy supplies from Brunei and Indonesia. Hong Kong also has no natural resources. All it can offer is a safe harbor. Gustav and Fei (1988) noted, however, that if location is considered as a natural resource, Singapore and Hong Kong probably have some advantages over their neighbors because of their entrepots.